QS have released Patch info!

[Hydro]

Send it to QA by the end of APRIL?!!!

Will there be any people left playing by then?

I do like this game, but I have to say my interest is starting to wane. The bugs are starting to 'bug' me and I find I'm spending more time on polished games like SMAC/X.

I have to say I had high hopes that the patch would re-invigorate the game, and interest. Now I wonder if the patch will be tumbleweed rolling across a deserted, silent plain (with low fertility...).

[habadacus]

You would think that judging from the status updates, that a lot of stuff is already fixed. END OF APRIL?! Don't forget IG.QA was the same body of scholars that let the game go out the door with no AI, faulty PD, and a viceroy with a hardon for troops transports. If they had done their job in the first place, we wouldn't need such a massive patch. Of course on the other hand if they had done their job we'd probably still be waiting for the initial release.
It seems to me like they're doing a lousy job of damage control, they must have known the problems with the game before it released, and so should have been working hard on a patch immediately, and taken all steps to streamline the process to get the patch out ASAP. While they take their time, PC Gamer just released their review - a hot steamy pile of 57%. Do they really think that delaying the patch for "QA" is going to revive interest in this game, or show the community how much they care? What the worst thing that could happen with an untested patch? The gamke will be broken? The damned thing is broken now! The patch should have been out yesterday, at least to show that work was bieng done, and concerns were being addressed, and that QS had the capability to fix these things in a timely manner. Like I say, I'm waiting until the 15th, and then, back it goes. There's about 1000 copies on eBay, maybe I'll try it again in however long it takes for QS to pull their collective heads out of their asses.

[The Rusty Gamer]

Are WE (the users) the real problem?

Gee, say, you don't think we might be part of the problem do you? I mean, hassling them for ages "When's the game going to be out, when's the game going to be out, when's the game going to be out"?????? Nagging them, brow beating them, bullying them, pressuring them until they finally give in and bring it out even though they knew it needed another two years. Now I think about it maybe that's what the problem was with Civ 3 as well? I mean, we have a go at them about release delays and then have another go at them about bringing out the game prematurely. Yeeesh! These developers can't win can they! Damned if they do and damned if they don't!

Ah, the good old days, the golden era of games before the proliferation of the internet when a game could be created in relative isolation, the developers could relax and take their time with it without thousands of game zealots breathing down their necks. Maybe the first we would even hear about the game is after it is on the shelves, fully tested and well-balanced.

Perhaps it's time we got out of these game developers faces and just let them get on with it.

[OmniDude]

Rusty,

that's the conclusion that I, for one, have reached. After AC, Civ3 and now Moo3, I'm done hanging around prerelease-forums for months - even years! - waiting impatiently.
Spare the dev's of the pressure and me of the almost inevitable disappointment.

[Kahn]

Well, if you can call it that.

All I have seen so far is a lot of talk about "tweaked code that handled negotiations..." but until they put up something that real people can download, and fixes the crash bugs for the 60% of consumers who can't play it, I wouldn't advise getting too excited, and I, in turn, will withhold my final judgment upon the game.

The most alarming indicator that all hope may be lost though, is the fact that anyone having real technical problems with the game, posting at the Infogrames forums is immediately decended upon by very vocal minority (about 20), who attack them like a pack of wild wolves. If the complainer is technically compentent, then Stencho or somebody just deletes them. Apparently this is what they call "customer service". This does not bode well for the future of MoO3, or Inforgrames as a whole.

[Nirvana_CN]

Well, i have done beta and alpa testing for 5 or 6 games..mostly RTS, Q+A checking on a game can take months in itself, and its not unusual for the Q+A to take longer than the patch itself, i wouldnt expect this patch to be out until at least a month or two after they submit it, so may or june sometime..unless they rush it out i guess.

I much prefer Gal-civ's method of releasing patches every week, with small changes instead of one big patch, it lowers Q+A imensely, and creates a far far happier community.

Dont forget that its Infrogrames who does the Q+A not Quiksilver..and Infrogrames aint known for speedy, or even many patches

[Kahn]

Really though, I fail to believe that this "game" supposedly got through "beta testing" with no one experiencing the dreaded "DirectX surface not available" error that seems to plague more than half the customers now. Logic also tells me not to hold out much hope that tweaking a spreadsheet is going to correct a DX problem that manifests itself even while your watching the Bink intro either. The Bink API is very robust (I've used it myself) and this is the first instance I've seen it fail. Apparently all the programmers must have been asleep during the "Introduction to C++ Programming" class.

I was going to buy GC, but after witnessing this travesty, I've decided to hold on to my money for the time being.

Sad, very sad.

[Jamski]

You're one of the disaffected IGMoO Forum posters aren't you? Welcome to Apolyton Hope you enjoy your stay. I can't believe that some people are so passionate in their attack and defence of MoO3, its only a game after all. Hmm, things are a bit calmer here, thank God.

-Jam

[CharlesBHoff]

Re: Well, if you can call it that.

Originally posted by Kahn
All I have seen so far is a lot of talk about "tweaked code that handled negotiations..." but until they put up something that real people can download, and fixes the crash bugs for the 60% of consumers who can't play it, I wouldn't advise getting too excited, and I, in turn, will withhold my final judgment upon the game.

The most alarming indicator that all hope may be lost though, is the fact that anyone having real technical problems with the game, posting at the Infogrames forums is immediately decended upon by very vocal minority (about 20), who attack them like a pack of wild wolves. If the complainer is technically compentent, then Stencho or somebody just deletes them. Apparently this is what they call "customer service". This does not bode well for the future of MoO3, or Inforgrames as a whole.

The company that release Pool of Radialate the new one not
the old DOS classist did the same thing they even have than person who didnot even have the game attack the people who did and want patches it was like pulling teeth.
At least QS and Infogames are making than patch on their own.

[The Templar]

Re: Re: Well, if you can call it that.

Originally posted by CharlesBHoff
The company that release Pool of Radialate the new one not
the old DOS classist did the same thing they even have than person who didnot even have the game attack the people who did and want patches it was like pulling teeth.
At least QS and Infogames are making than patch on their own.

Half the time, I can't even tell what this guy is talking about.

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by vmxa1


Not sure why I should presume they will do some magic in a massive patch, I hope so though.

There was not all that much wrong with Civ3 when it came out. Many improvements were made over time, but the game was fun day 1 for those who liked it.
I have not seen/heard that many saving Moo3 was fun.
Some people liked it, but they are not raving or anything. I played two games, found it hard to continue and await improvements.
IOW Moo3 is no where near as enjoyable as Civ3 was on day 1.

Heh, and MOO3 is fun *from day one* for those who like it as well. Not to say MOO3 isn't without flaws, but trust the fine, FICKLE folks here at APoly to bash any game that doesn't live up to their individual expectations.

If QS is as dedicated to improving MOO3 as Firaxis was with Civ3, then this title will be better than either of the original MOO games.

Two things I have noticed:
1) Get Colin's mod if you want an AI that will actually force you to fight and think more than the default AI (interface issues still persist but the AI actually does seem to have a brain with this mod).
2) The vast majority of the people I have seen bash the crap out of MOO3 are the people who loved MOO2 and never played MOO(original). Personally I hated MOO2 because it was micro nightmare, and if people were expecting MOO2.5 instead of MOO3 they are disappointed. Sounds almost like the same complaints that came from the Civ2 crowd who wanted Civ2.5 and not Civ3 as well, heh.

For what it's worth, I have nothing against the game in general but I have slacked off on playing because having to re-do the Dev plans every game and having to micro-manage the military build queue when virtually everything else is macro manage oriented. Most of the issues I have with the game have been mentioned as being worked on with the patch or future patches. Much as Civ3 was good, it didn't become great and addictive until 1.21 and especially 1.29 patches. I have the same expectations and hopes for MOO3.

[Ozymandous]

Re: Well, if you can call it that.

Originally posted by Kahn
All I have seen so far is a lot of talk about "tweaked code that handled negotiations..." but until they put up something that real people can download, and fixes the crash bugs for the 60% of consumers who can't play it, I wouldn't advise getting too excited, and I, in turn, will withhold my final judgment upon the game.

The most alarming indicator that all hope may be lost though, is the fact that anyone having real technical problems with the game, posting at the Infogrames forums is immediately decended upon by very vocal minority (about 20), who attack them like a pack of wild wolves. If the complainer is technically compentent, then Stencho or somebody just deletes them. Apparently this is what they call "customer service". This does not bode well for the future of MoO3, or Inforgrames as a whole.

Maybe that's why IG has a TECH SUPPORT department where you can write or call to try to resolve your problem instead of *****ing and moaning constantly on the general forums?

SOmetimes the squeaky wheel doesn't get the grease it get's deleted.

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by Nirvana_CN
Well, i have done beta and alpa testing for 5 or 6 games..mostly RTS, Q+A checking on a game can take months in itself, and its not unusual for the Q+A to take longer than the patch itself, i wouldnt expect this patch to be out until at least a month or two after they submit it, so may or june sometime..unless they rush it out i guess.

I much prefer Gal-civ's method of releasing patches every week, with small changes instead of one big patch, it lowers Q+A imensely, and creates a far far happier community.

Dont forget that its Infrogrames who does the Q+A not Quiksilver..and Infrogrames aint known for speedy, or even many patches

Of course, on the flip side, when you release a small patch each week you have folks who take a cursory glance and say "holy cow, this game has had TWENTY patches? I don't even want to look at this buggy piece of crap!"

Six of one, half-dozen of another, whether or not you have 4 patches in a month or one patch that fixes four things in a month, stuff still get's fixed. I could care less how many patches the game recieves as long as they keep patching until most of the MAJOR issues (no military dev plans, etc) are fixed.

Seems like a lot of folks could use a healthy does of patience. I know games that have been out 6 months and haven't been patched *yet*, and I have lived through the DIablo2 fiasco, where each patch BROKE another aspect of the game because they were rushed out with little to NO QA processes, so a little longer, but throughly tested is better than the other way around.

[BobD]

Originally posted by Ozymandous

Seems like a lot of folks could use a healthy does of patience. I know games that have been out 6 months and haven't been patched *yet*, and I have lived through the DIablo2 fiasco, where each patch BROKE another aspect of the game because they were rushed out with little to NO QA processes, so a little longer, but throughly tested is better than the other way around.

I suppose you are one of the lucky few who isn't plagued by the DirectX SU error practically every turn. I personally like this game very much, but until they fix this bug I'm not going to waste any more time reloading the game every 5 minutes .

[CharlesBHoff]

Re: Re: Re: Well, if you can call it that.

Originally posted by The Templar


Half the time, I can't even tell what this guy is talking about.

The Pool of Radiaion have many bugs that effect gameplay and many bugs that crash the game back to desktop. The company answer was there is no bugs in our game at all. They have this person who didnot even have the game at all
saying there is no need to patch anything. The only problen they patch was the framous MS safe disk uninstall deleteing half of your window files while uninstalling the game forceing
you to do than complete install of window. All the rest that needed to be patch was than major fight in itself. I have MOO 1, MOO2, and MOO3 so I do have the game and play it so I do know it have some problen that needed to be patch.